The CSI Effect: Popular TV Shows

In 2006, over 100 million people in the United States tuned in to watch either CSI or any if the other forensic and criminal investigation related television show each week (CJSG). Since then, the number of viewers has increased rapidly, as well as the amount of television shows with the same type of theme. As a result of the increase of these television programs, researchers are discovering a new phenomenon called the ‘CSI Effect’ that seems to be fueling an interest in forensic science and criminal investigations nationwide. This effect is actually the ability of criminal justice themed television shows to influence and increase victims’, jurors’ and criminals’ ideas about forensics, DNA testing and methods, and criminal investigations

One major difference I noticed about CSI on T.V. compared to real life is the way that things always seem to be fast and easy when in reality it takes a long time and can be complicated. For instance in many shows such CSI Miami, Bones, etc. when they test blood samples, DNA, fingerprints or other things it seems to only take minutes, when in reality it can take weeks or months to get the actual results. Another thing would be the amount of education and training needed. You must be able to perform many things such as drug analysis, trace evidence and much more. Forensics isn't as easy as just taking pictures and bagging evidence. It requires years of education and months of training which is rarely mentioned in the shows. Some T.V. shows rarely

Forensics has changed the way our criminal system works now. A lot of cases are being solved because of the development of forensics. Even cold cases are being brought up to the light to be investigated again and a good percentage of the cases are being solved and criminals are being brought to justice. The green river killer is one case that really got me intrigued into forensics and I got mesmerized by the techniques that are being used to catch murderers and other crimes being committed. The green river killer had an interesting childhood that led him to be a serial killer. He committed multiple murders on prostitutes and left there families with agony and pain. But advances in DNA ultimately led to his demise, police officers were able

The CSI effect has a very major influence on today’s crime scene. The CSI effect is no myth. It gives the idea of considerable forensic evidence may be very prevalent to a crime scene. Television crime shows may give a misleading imitation that all evidence is relevant. Most evidence may be thrown out because it does not have any significance.

Nearly anyone you ask would be familiar with the television show CSI. The crime lab is colorful and high-tech with all of the fun toys and machines that analysts use to test the ever abundant amount of forensic evidence from every crime scene. It makes for an exciting drama that you cannot help but get immersed in—it also gives us a false illusion, however, creating what has been dubbed as the “CSI effect” (Baskin, 2011). This effect describes the idea that crime shows such as CSI generate unreal expectations, making viewers believe that forensic evidence should be existent in all criminal trials, therefore affecting their overall perspective on a case (Baskin, 2011). But in reality, forensic labs are not that glamorous. In fact, the

The Crime Control Model states that there may be some individual rights that need to be sacrificed for the good of society as a whole. In the Crime Control Model crime is actively and aggressively pursued and punished. Some of the methods used to employ this method are "targeting high crime areas, increased patrols and traffic stops, profiling, undercover sting operations, wiretapping, surveillance, and aggressive raids and searches." (Perron) The benefits of the Crime Control Model are that criminals and crime itself is what law enforcement begins to target. The negative effect is that the zealous pursuit of crime and often result in huge amounts of collateral damage or even loss of human life.

Forensic Science has contributed to our world a great deal. People often misunderstand Forensic Science and believe it is much more capable than it really is. As a matter of fact what you see on T.V. is around 80% false or over exaggerated in some way. To Start of, Criminal Investigation is the largest and most known form of Forensic Science. Some of the more known areas include; Fingerprinting, Ballistics, DNA Identification, Fiber Samples, Computer Animation, Documentation analysis, etc. To get this out of the way in the beginning, what you saw on last night’s law and order is far from the truth. Things they do in a matter of hours take months at a time, and most of the time aren’t even plausible concepts.

According to Rachel Boba, “Crime analysis is a law enforcement function that involves systematic analysis for identifying and analyzing patterns and trends in crime and disorder” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime analysis).The information on these patterns can assist law enforcement agencies in the deployment of resources in a more effective manner; it can also help detectives to identify and catch suspects. Crime analysis also plays a role in improvising solutions to crime problems, and developing crime prevention strategies. There are various types of technology that is used in crime analysis. Crime analysis relies heavily on computer technology, and over the past fifteen years there has been a significant improvement in computer hardware and

Less frequently, individuals will allude to the "CSI Effect" to allude to the inverse, nonetheless. Defense attorneys, for instance, now and again contend that attendants impacted by "CSI" have a tendency to accept that any scientific confirmation gathered will be implicating. This is likewise hazardous, commentators say, in light of the fact that individuals don't normally think about the likelihood of error or even fraud [source: Cole. Scientific researchers have been known to fudge results about request to get a conviction, in the event that they accept that is the thing that the police desire. Take, for instance, Joyce Gilchrist, a police scientific expert who

In the end, getting a winning edge on the crime scene can make a safer America, but insufficient results will keep the system from taking off. The idea of catching a criminal before an atrocity occurs is appealing to the everyday people of America. But in the same way a product cannot impact people without proof of concept, the precognitive system will not win over our nation until its usefulness is in action. After all, technology is driving America, and the use of a precognitive system is the first step in the criminal

In March 2005, CBS News Correspondent, Brian Dakss (2005), wrote an article which referenced the “CSI effect” after he reported, “It seems the popular CBS TV show on crime scene investigators is having an effect on real-life jurors. They want a clear trail of evidence, or they won 't vote guilty." The Early Show, national correspondent Hattie Kauffman stated, “More than 60 million people watch the CSI shows every week, which means a lot of potential jurors now have high expectations of forensic evidence. The CSI Effect is felt in courtrooms from coast to coast” (Dakss, 2005)

The CSI Effect is the belief that television crime shows are effecting decisions made in the court rooms from jurors. Prosecutors and Judges believe that these shows are causing jurors to be out of touch with reality when it comes to making a decision about a case in the court room. The Jurors are said to be out of touch with reality because they have a demand for conclusive scientific evidence. People who experience the CSI Effect tend to think they are experts in the field. Many forensic professionals have faced the occasional person at a crime scene telling them how to do their jobs the way they saw it on CSI (The CSI Effect-Crime Museum, n.d.).

The CSI Effect is becoming to take it’s place in courtrooms and the prosecutors aren 't liking it. Prosecutors are feeling there is no hope for getting a conviction when it’s come to the CSI Effect because they believe that it has control over the juror’s applying justice to criminal. The CSI Effect is being criticized for not allowing prosecutors a fair chance at a conviction in a jury trial for the belief that Jurors are influenced by what they see on T.V shows and how they believe that the use of forensic science should be used more to prove a person guilty of a crime. The CSI Effect is to be determined if whether or not it can affect the way a case is determined in the eyes of the jury.

With producing reality shows comes producing inaccuracies in portrayals in order to reach as many viewers and gain as high ratings as possible every week with each new episode. Every day life is boring, yet people tend to be attracted to the relatable shows that portray real life in eccentric ways – ways that they believe could be imitated by the average person. In many cases, these shows could remain harmless, as it is entertainment. No matter how crude or erroneous, it is just television. However, what happens when these sources of amusement actually start being damaging? Research has shown that crime shows like the ever popular CSI: Crime Scene Investigation have started becoming significantly detrimental to criminal

There has been a lot of research intending to fully discover the extent of the CSI effect television that has found its impact to be negative. Of the multitudes of negative impacts of the CSI effects, among the most prevalent are the unrealistic expectations that viewers have of DNA and other types of forensic evidence in the courtroom. In Ley, Jankowski, and Brewer’s study, they analyzed a large sample of CSI episodes for their content relating to forensic science. The study found that that in 94% of all episodes in the sample the detectives used DNA evidence to solve cases. Also, in 88% of all cases shown, the